5Dii Owners

[Feirny]

To those of you who own a 5Dii, only Andy that I know of?, did any of you buy a lens with the body or did you buy body only?

I'm looking to get mine pretty soon, but is the 24-70 f2.8L £400 better than the 24-105 f4L?

Or, am I better off buying body only and getting a different lens separately?

 

[unofficialPete]

I don't own a 5D but I'm pretty sure you'll get the lens cheaper as a bundle & outside of the two on offer, unless you like to shoot primes there isn't anything better. I'd love a 35L.

As for 24-70 or 24-105 debate, its a never ending on POTN (http://photography-on-the.net), comes up like a burning Clio V6. Ultimately, do you need f/2.8? do you shoot low light? plan to shoot weddings etc.? or does more reach fit your needs?

 

[Andy.]

I picked up the bundle with the 24-105, even though I already had one with my 40D. I sold one for a fair bit more than it cost in the kit so the camera body ended up costing less in total.... in some obscure way. The 2nd hand market over here is really good so it was simple enough to do, but I don't know how easy it would be for you to sell it off for a decent price in the UK.

The debate between the 24-70 and 24-105 is a tough one. I have had two 24-105's and borrowed a 24-70 for a week and have decided to stick with the 24-105 for my needs. The longer reach on the 5D is pretty handy, but if you have never felt the need to have more than 65mm for a walkaround lens on a crop sensor, then that doesn't apply to you. I also get more use from the IS than I would from one extra stop, especially as you get usable images at ISO6400. In terms of image quality, there is nothing in it really. There is a little more distortion at 24mm on the 24-105, but Lightroom sorts that automatically. The only thing that you don't get is the slightly better bookeh of f2.8.

The image quality will blow you away. 100% crops look just as good as they did fitting the screen.

(any excuse)

Studio test shots by .monk3y, on Flickr

(100% crop, with me in the reflection of her pupil)

Studio test shots by .monk3y, on Flickr

Swings & Roundabouts by .monk3y, on Flickr

100% of some crusty bogies on my yougest.

100% by .monk3y, on Flickr

 

[dunganick]

I used a hired 24-105 and was left very unimpressed. It was far from perfect conditions (indoors in the evening), but the AF was inaccurate and seeked tons, often locking OOF. I have no idea if this was just an abused hired example.

At the end of the day there is £400 difference, if you cant afford the more expensive lens then dont get it. If you can then you will love the F2.8.

 

[Andy.]

I'd call bad lens on the one that you tried. I don't have a complaint about the AF speed or accuracy on mine. The 50mm f1.4 I just got shot of is another matter....

It is also worth noting that in low light, most of the outer AF points on the 5DII are pretty useless with any lens unless you get something with high contrast. 9 times out of 10 I just use the centre point and recompose as that doesn't have the same issue.

 

[Feirny]

I used a hired 24-105 and was left very unimpressed. It was far from perfect conditions (indoors in the evening), but the AF was inaccurate and seeked tons, often locking OOF. I have no idea if this was just an abused hired example.

At the end of the day there is £400 difference, if you cant afford the more expensive lens then dont get it. If you can then you will love the F2.8.

I can afford it, it's just whether the £400 may be better used elsewhere. I would love F2.8

Andy those pics are cracking! Very impressed. I think I'll plump for the 24-70 and if I don't like it, shift it on and get something else.

Pete, I want to stay away from primes for the time being, mainly for the sake of my wallet. I wouldn't need the extra reach as I'll be going for a 70-200 F4L at some point soon anyway.
Also I shoot some wedding things, not weddings per se, but may move into them soon enough, and a lot is low light. My main use hobby wise is Automotive.

 

[Andy.]

L glass never really looses its value if you buy right so there is no harm in trying something and selling on if you don't like it. If they ever bring out the 24-70 f2.8 IS I'll make the switch.

200mm is also not that long on the 5DII. I'm now looking at getting a 2x converter to help my 70-200 along. I just hope that the quality doesn't take too much of a hit.

The 5DII handless low light very well (except for the outer focus points). Quality up to ISO3200-6400 is equal to the 1DIV, after that the 1DIV leaves the 5D way behind though.

 

[Feirny]

Yeah that's what I thought Andy, I know someone who will probably buy off me anyway, if I do decide to sell on. I would probably also sell up for the IS model too.

200mm would be suitable for now, I have access to a Sigma 50-500 if I do need it, and also a 1.4x or a 2x converter, just can't afford the 70-200 F2.8L :dapprove:

Looking at some pocket wizards too, or a lighting kit that I can use outdoors off a battery of some sort.

 

[dunganick]

Get the 70-200 2.8 non IS.... You know you want to!

Que discussion about IS V's Non IS etc...

The 70-200 2.8 handles a 1.4x tc superbly (like its not there!)

 

[Andy.]

Get the 70-200 2.8 non IS.... You know you want to!

Que discussion about IS V's Non IS etc...

The 70-200 2.8 handles a 1.4x tc superbly (like its not there!)

& MkI vs MkII.

 

[Feirny]

Get the 70-200 2.8 non IS.... You know you want to!

Que discussion about IS V's Non IS etc...

The 70-200 2.8 handles a 1.4x tc superbly (like its not there!)

A better price than I was expecting!

 

[dunganick]

In my (biased) opinion its a cracking lens for the money. It also barely looses any money, albeit the discontinued IS 1 will start to drive the used value down a bit. Especially given how much the price of the IS 2 has fallen.

 

[MikeoftheQuays]

I'm now looking at getting a 2x converter to help my 70-200 along. I just hope that the quality doesn't take too much of a hit.

From the samples I have seen the x2 converter does have a noticeable detrimental affect on quality. Still better than not having it and cropping but don't be thinking it's anywhere near as good as something like the 100-400.

IRT Topic: Having a f2.8 lens is great but they're sooo big and heavy. I replaced my 70-200 2.8 for the 55-250 IS. It's not in the same league as the 70-200 obviously but I could never be arsed carting it round with me cos it was so big and weighty. Unless you're printing big you're not gonna see a difference! Mind you, if you're not printing big you don't need a 5DII anyway.

 

[Andy.]

I've ordered it for a good price. I can always sell it on if it's s**t.

One of my photos has just been printed 2x3 metres and still looks pretty good from a few feet away. 60-80 cm is my normal limit.

I agree with you on the weight of the 2.8, but the quality makes it all worthwhile.

 

[MikeoftheQuays]

Heh. You're in a different league to me then if you're printing at that size. The vast majority of my photos never make it off the computer and those that do get printed don't go very big... Hence me still using my venerable old 30D and selling all my fancy fast glass.

 

[dunganick]

I still dont see any 70-200's as heavy. Try hand holding a 300 2.8 for a day. The 70-200 feels feather weight in comparison and i can hand hold that all day.

 

[MikeoftheQuays]

Well obviously I like nothing more than walking around all day capturing candids with my Sigma 200-500 f2.8...

It's all relative isn't it? Compared to a fast tele then yeah, the f2.8 zooms aren't huge. However if you're moving up from a consumer zoom or even a P&S then a 5DII with a 70-200 2.8 is going to seem huge. And extremely heavy.

I guess it also depends on your usage. Sometimes fast glass is essential. Sometimes however folks buy it cos it's expensive and they think it's the best, they then go around shooting everything wide open thinking the shallow DOF makes them look more pro (I know I did!). Eventually, if they're smart, they'll realise they don't need these big heavy lenses and something slower but considerably lighter and cheaper produces results every bit as good.

I don't know you folks and so don't know what's best for you. I just know the 24-105 is a cracking all-rounder whereas the 24-70 is a fairly specialist bit of kit.

 

[dunganick]

I just think its unfair to say the 70-200 is heavy. Its heavy in comparison to a light lens. But its light enough to carry all day long, i know as i do, and i'm not exactly mr muscle.

Each to their own i guess

 

[Feirny]

Good little debate going on in here LOL.

I'll be going for the 5Dii, with the 24-70 f2.8, and if I don't like the lens, I'll chop it in for something else. Also looking at buying a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 after using a friends, it's awesome.

I'm not bothered about weight, although my camera bag weighs roughly the same as me.

I also may be printing a few bits off, I can get any size print done free it it's for me personally, as a family friend has a printing business.

 

[Danny133]

considered a 7D? ok its crop but has more features than the 5II .. although yes you loose the full frame ..

 

[RyanD]

5D II lovely body. However the AF isnt great IMO (no step up from the 5D mki) alot of people felt this which is why the MKIII is so eagerly anticipated.

Re lenses, got a 24-105 and a 24-70 here, personally I dont like the 24-105, ive used both in anger and felt the 24-70 was worth the money. But it depends on the needs of the individual. Some people spec everything 2.8 yet they are shooting landscapes at F22 all the time. Ok I know thats a can of worms but what I am saying is build the kit around your needs.

 

[Feirny]

Purchased, I await delivery now, like a little kid! :approve:

 

[Andy.]

Niiiiiiice. Hope you don't have to wait long. I was waiting for nearly three months for mine to arrive and it nearly drove me mental.

Lens ordered too?

 

[Feirny]

Paid for next day delivery, so expect it wednesday, but I'm at work till 9pm! Won't get to use it till the weekend.

Nah no lens yet, buying a friends Sigma 24-70 f2.8 off him, and will save for the Canon L variant in the mean time. Buying a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 soon though, it's either that or a Canon 70-200 F4L, not wanting to spend too big with car tax and insurance looming.

 

[Spiezels]

You using it for stills or video mostly Feirny.

Flat mate got one few months ago, get some INCREDIBLE shots (video) Done a couple of shorts on it so far which have been accepted into a few festivals.

Very very very good cameras for what you pay especially for video.

 

[Feirny]

It'll mainly be stills Luke, but going back into video now too, been practising with a 60D recently.

Got any of your stuff? Be interesting to see.

 

[Spiezels]

Yeah mate, with the capabilites of it it'd be silly not to have a blast video wise, very easy to create stunning looking footage tbh.

Our 5D stuff has been entered into the fest's unfortunately so it cant be uploaded to the net yet! Will be on as soon as it can be though.

Last music vid we did here though (EX3, letus extreme, lense adaptor etc and that glide cam i'm wearing in the photos) ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T8UO0Sl5-w

Keep us posted on your progress with the 5!

 

[Feirny]

That's pretty decent, that. My stuff is nowhere near that standard, but looking at doing automotive stuff.

Will keep you updated mate, you'll probs see it via facebook anyway.

 

[SamP]

Cant wait to trade my 7D and 10 - 22 for a 5D(x) and a 16 - 35... So much want.

 

[rio172]

Full frame and no looking back lol enjoyyyyyy :approve:

 

[Feirny]

HSBC blocked my payment, so had to sort that out, it's being delivered tomorrow. And I'm at work! Least I have the weekend to play.

 

[jenic]

You coming to play Saturday then?

Did you ever get those photo's from that sheffield meet?

 

[Feirny]

I need to get them off Charlie, he has them working fine. Just not seen him since the meet.

Depends where we're going, PM me!

 

[Andy.]

... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T8UO0Sl5-w ...

Nice video! What did you use for editing?